FWIW, not that it's a valid comparison, but since such a comparison was mentioned, our CD ladder with its just below 4% APY, outperformed GQGPX with its 3.4% average annual return over the past 3-yr period.
;-)

It’s good you limited the GQGPX vs CD ladder comparison to 3 years, since at 5 years you’d be facing an 10.68% annualized bogey for GQGPX. So yes, it’s not a valid comparison.

Thing to remember is that MPT stats alpha, beta, R^2, r depend on the benchmark used.
But SD is independent of the benchmark. So, it may be used to compare volatility of things that are different, i.e. different asset classes.
A ratio of SD can be found using the SD of a benchmark that could be SP500, EAFE, MSCI EM, etc.
Even so,
SD/SDbenchmark = beta/r,
or, SD = (beta/r)*SDbenchmark.
It is rather remarkable that the 3 quantities in the right-hand side depend on the benchmark used, but the left-hand side, SD, is independent of the benchmark.
So, use SDem/SDsp500 OR SDem/SDmsciem.

...see zero reason to comp (EM) the performance to the S&P 500. It's comparing Apples to Mandarins... one is entitled to their opinion and whether it's 9.36 or 10 %, still beats Bonds, Cash, CD's despite their inflated yields currently

I agree with you @KHaw24. Comparing every stock sector, geographical area and cap-space investment to the SP500 is just, well, silly. With that reasoning, why diversify? All those different style investments are supposed to be different and excel at different times and blend together long term.
All that said, at the ripe old age of 70, I now see no reason to hold specific EM funds myself. But that's just my comfort zone and opinion.

FWIW, not that it's a valid comparison, but since such a comparison was mentioned, our CD ladder with its just below 4% APY, outperformed GQGPX with its 3.4% average annual return over the past 3-yr period. It currently has a 5+% APY, but it is not intended to compete with stock investments, rather with bonds.
;-)

GRID is great!.... 20% Utilities. Tracks an opaque index NASDAQ OMX Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure QGRD, which has beaten global equities recently
https://cleanedge.com/data-dive-charts/Smart-Grid-Infrastructure-vs-Nasdaq-Global-0
NLR "nuclear power" is 50% Utilities based on another opaque index MVIS® Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Supposedly these companies have to get 50% of revenue from nuclear power related activities, but I think they fudge it saying "expected to get"
Uranium is on fire in the last year or so
Of course now it has hit the headlines, it will all fall apart
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/03/07/ai-data-centers-power/
Has anyone looked to see if any active mangers missed Utilities with significant exposure to wildfires?
I read the pole that started the fire in Texas was so rotten it had a sign on it that said "Do not Climb" Utilities will have to get a lot quicker a in repairing their stuff, or smarter in turning off the power with high winds. A switch that cuts power automatically with high winds or when line falls would be a great idea

I-Bonds can only be bought and sold online through Treasury Direct.
You can still get paper bonds with your 1040 refund (up to $5,000 per year). But you have to hope that they don't get lost in the mail (one of mine did). Then to cash them in you either have to mail them to TreasuryDirect or try to cash them at a bank.
Here's Rob Copeland talking with Kai Ryssdal (Marketplace) about the problems he had doing just that.
"what’s happened over the past few years is a lot of banks are starting to reject [savings bonds]. ... when a bank does that transaction [cashes bonds] for you, they make exactly zero cents. And in many cases, these banks just don’t want to do it anymore."
https://www.marketplace.org/2023/10/12/got-old-savings-bonds-lying-around-good-luck-cashing-them/
And the full NYTimes article that Copeland wrote:
When Did Cashing Savings Bonds Become So Impossible?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/07/business/cashing-savings-bonds.html

If you inherit savings bonds, make sure that you know whether the deceased has already paid taxes on savings bond interest up to the date of inheritance.
That can happen in two ways.
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p559#en_US_2023_publink100099599
1. Investors (including the decedent) have the option of declaring interest income annually. There's little benefit I see in that, unless the investor is expecting to be in a significantly higher tax bracket when the savings bonds are finally sold or they mature.
2. The person (executor, administrator) filing the decedent's final return can choose to include all interest up to date of death in the decedent's income for the year of death. This can be advantageous: the decedent is likely retired and may be in a lower tax bracket than the heirs and/or taxes the decedent pays reduces the size of the estate. That matters if the estate is large enough to be taxed (estate tax or inheritance tax).
If taxes on some of the interest was paid by the decedent, then on your 1040 Schedule B (interest income) you declare the full amount on your 1099-INT, subtotal all the interest, and then below the subtotal you include a line for the taxes already paid:
U.S. Savings Bond Interest Previously Reported (dollar amount)
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p550#en_US_2022_publink100010051
If you're an executor, don't forget about #2 above.

Lipper categorizes DIVO as an equity-income fund. In that category it is an MFO "Great Owl." At the present time it is writing calls against four stocks in its portfolio rather than the entire S&P 500.
For me, JEPI does not have enough of a track record. And I am not sold on the idea of writing calls against entire indexes.
If I set MFO premium to a five-year window, DIVO's APR out performs all of the other ETF's in the Options Arbitrage category, and with respectable Martin and Sortino scores. Over its seven year history it outperforms its competitors, and has the best Martin and Sortino scores. If one only looks back a year, then DIVO and JEPI are getting smoked by the majority of etf's in the category.
For my purposes, DIVO was competing with AMFFX rather than JEPI. DIVO is cheaper than AMFFX. DIVO versus AMFFX.
Yet another dinky linky.

Every fund in my portfolio fills a niche. I have owned the Wellington funds for more than 25 years but WBALX for example has a bond duration of 1.8 yrs vs the almost 7 years in the Wellington funds. Its bond ratings are also higher ,so again it fits the more conservative part of a portfolio.

Well, there are @Devo, DIVO, Davo, Davos.
DIVO is a call-writing funds. It's lags the industry giant JEPI and is more expensive too. In the up markets like this, it may be covering its calls, or its stocks are being called away. But that is the deal - you give up some upside for options income. Here are the charts for JEPI, DIVO, IVV/SP500.
https://stockcharts.com/h-perf/ui?s=JEPI&compare=DIVO,IVV&id=p47538115979

From my following and researching CGBL, I have been pleased with its behavior. Its fixed income sleeve Core Plus. The only reason I have not invested in it is because of potential high distributions from its fixed income sleeve (bonds with market discounts) if I were to put it in a taxable account. But may be with good inflows, some of that distribution will be picked up by shareholders coming in later. Any thoughts?

Morningstar reports that its fixed income securities have an average discount (weighted) of under 1%. That is, its average weighted fixed income price is 99.27. That's essentially par. In comparison, on average, moderate allocation ETFs have portfolios with an average discount of 7% (92.90 weighted fixed income price).
https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/cgbl/portfolio
(select "Bond" next to "Portfolio" toward upper left)
What is your concern with CGBL discount bonds? It looks like the ETF's high interest is coming from the coupons, not any discount. Average coupon yield is 5.32% vs. 3.90% for its peers. It's coupon, not discount, accounting for high YTM.
For whatever discount is due to OID, the fund declares and distributes accretion (progression toward par value/reduction of discount) annually. Consequently at maturity all OID is accounted for. In short, OID bonds do not realize a big gain at maturity or sale.
Market discount is different. The rule is that investors (whether individuals or funds) can treat it the same way as OID (declaring it as annual income, gradually accreting), or defer all accretion (gain) until maturity or sale. It sounds like the latter is what you are concerned about.
However, this portfolio has a roughly counterbalancing amount of premium bonds (weighted average price is 99.27). So ISTM gains on discount bonds (generally treated as ordinary income) could be balanced out by losses on premium bonds (sometimes treated as negative ordinary income).
The links below give details on taxation of discount and premium bonds and how funds are required to handle OID "phantom interest" - what the last reference calls a "situation".
Schwab, When Should You Pay Taxes on Discount Bonds?
Baird, Tax Treatment of Bond Premium and Discount
K&L Gates, Introduction to Original Issue Discount
(last couple of slides describe how OID bonds in a mutual fund portfolio creates a "situation")

@fundly. +100. DO NOT LOSE IT. you speak the truth. If you use portfolio visualizer try a 50 / 50 mix of vanguard Wellesley and Wellington which becomes a 50/50 allocation. Its worst year is less than WBALX and the return is much higher. And of course the ER is way less.
[snip]

I know of a poster on another investing board whose portfolio is a 50/50 mix of Wellesley and Wellington.
This approach is simple to execute, has low expenses, and good risk-adjusted past performance.
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=60vGLZ2IHHbVmPAjuywMqr

I like and own WBALX for the more conservative part of the portfolio. 50/50 and quite conservative. Small 230K AUM. When the s--t hits the fan this should lose less. In retirement I hold the mantra, "Do not lose it " in high esteem.

As a retired and conservative investor, I naturally agree with your mantra.
However, I use the following non-ETF funds with excellent risk/reward profiles and all with SD<10:
QDSNX, JHQAX, BLNDX, CBLDX and ICMUX.
The only ETF fund I use is TFLO.
By the way, JHQAX has an extremely low tax cost ratio of 0.23 according to M*.
So far, so good.
Fred

@fundly. +100. DO NOT LOSE IT. you speak the truth. If you use portfolio visualizer try a 50 / 50 mix of vanguard Wellesley and Wellington which becomes a 50/50 allocation. Its worst year is less than WBALX and the return is much higher. And of course the ER is way less. Or with a shorter history to look at try SCHD and DODIX. @50/50.

Hopefully, the end of this bull market will not be reminiscent of the Stock Market Crash of 1929!
Ed Yardeni states that the economy and consumers are doing well.
He believes there are opportunities available in tech, industrials, financials, and energy.
Mr. Yardeni's "one investment for a diversified long-term portfolio" is the S&P 1500.

I like and own WBALX for the more conservative part of the portfolio. 50/50 and quite conservative. Small 230K AUM. When the s--t hits the fan this should lose less. In retirement I hold the mantra, "Do not lose it " in high esteem.

2/3 in jqua (or ivv or vone) and the rest into 5% Fido mm ?
I am staring at when to put a slug into rsp

I also invest for opportunity...it's been awhile since the 2004-2008 EM Bull market but maybe another region/country takes off ? I'll always own some and see zero reason to comp the performance to the S&P 500. It's comparing Apples to Mandarins... one is entitled to their opionion and whether it's 9.36 or 10 %, still beats Bonds, Cash, CD's despite their inflated yields currently

@sma3,
The warrants they received in the deal are exercisable at $2.50, today’s closing price is $3.40.
I do not know anything about Indymac. If M did not do anything to drive stock price down and further dilute pre-existing shareholders, which some white knights and activist investors have done in deals, I agree this is worth a flyer and I can be persuaded to participate. At what price is an individual’s personal preference.

Fascinating cautionary tale for folks looking at Bitcoin ETFs and thinking "what's the worst that could happen?"
Joe Pinsker and Caitlin Ostroff offer this report in the Wall Street Journal (3/7/2024):

Joe Oathout lost $500,000 on bitcoin from his peak, but he didn't lose faith. Few would have the stomach to hold on after watching a $20,000 investment soar halfway to $1 million in 2021 only to have nearly all of it evaporate."

Good news: he's up to $169,000 (as of 3/7/24). Bad news: that's still down b 65% from its peak.
Much of crypto's surge, they report, came "following a strong urge of buying on one crypto exchange ... it is unclear what drove the rally and what it's sustainable."
Ummm ... my guesses: (1) speculation. (2) no. But that won't impact the behavior of those who need to believe.